https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290301 A second writ petition on the same facts was held incompetent after the earlier petition had been withdrawn without adjudication on merits and without liberty to file afresh. Constructive res judicata did not apply, but the rule against successive writ petitions and the Rajasthan High Court Rules barred the fresh petition. The Court also held that Article 226 relief could be refused for unexplained delay and laches, and a later Supreme Court decision did not amount to a new factual basis justifying refiling. The writ petition was therefore rightly rejected on both grounds. en-us Thu, 16 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Sep 2020 11:02:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290301 A second writ petition on the same facts was held incompetent after the earlier petition had been withdrawn without adjudication on merits and without liberty to file afresh. Constructive res judicata did not apply, but the rule against successive writ petitions and the Rajasthan High Court Rules barred the fresh petition. The Court also held that Article 226 relief could be refused for unexplained delay and laches, and a later Supreme Court decision did not amount to a new factual basis justifying refiling. The writ petition was therefore rightly rejected on both grounds. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290301